Sahebrao Pundlikrao Vidhale And Others v. Ramchandra S/O Baliramji Suryekar (Dead) Thr. Legal Heirs, Vasudha Wd/O Ramchandra Suryekar And ORS

0205mca987.16.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Misc. Civil Application (Review) No.987 of 2016 In Second Appeal No.437 of 2014 (D) (Sahebrao Pundlikrao Vidhale and others v. Ramchandra Baliramji Suryekar (Dead), through LRs. Nandatai Ghaware and others) Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's order Shri V.A. Kothale, Advocate for Applicants/Appellants. Shri Bhushan N. Mohta, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Coram : R.K. Deshpande, J.

Date : 2 nd May, 2017 Shri Kothale, the learned counsel for the applicants/review petitioners, has invited my attention to Exhibit 54 and agreement to sell and submits that it is signed only by the defendant No.1. He further submits that the power of attorney was not placed on record to establish that the other defendants had authorized the defendant No.1 to execute the agreement. He has relied upon of decisions of this Court as well as of the Apex Court - (i) Kashinath Rajaram Kasabe and others v. Ramchandra Tukaram Kasabe (deceased) as per L.Rs. and others, reported in 2015(1) Mh.L.J. 748; and (ii) Pemmada Prabhakar and others v. Youngmen's Vysya Association and others, reported in (2015) 5 SCC 355.

0205mca987.16.odt While dismissing the second appeal on 20-6-2016, this Court has dealt with all the aspects of the matter, and hence to permit the applicants/appellants to raise the same grounds again, would amount to re-opening of the decision without there being any ground under Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The Misc. Civil Application for review is dismissed. At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicants/appellants prays that the stay to the possession granted by this Court be continued for a further period of six weeks. The prayer is opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

In view of the fact that the second appeal was dismissed long back and the applicants/appellants had sufficient time to approach the Apex Court, I do not find any reason to continue the interim order passed by this Court.

Hence, the prayer is rejected.

Judge.

Lanjewar